Editor’s note: Lovefraud recently learned of a survey being conducted by Mothers of Lost Children. This organization says, “We group of mothers whose children are forced to visit unsupervised or live with their identified perpetrators through failures in the family and juvenile courts. Our children have disclosed abuse, and have not been protected or believed. The agencies designed to protect children have not helped, and in many cases have done harm. We have done everything we, as individuals, could do to protect them, yet have been unable to keep them safe.”

If you are facing this situation, Lovefraud encourages you to contribute to the research. Following is a description of the effort.

Protective Parent Survey

You are invited to participate in a study of “protective parents,” that is, parents who have encountered difficulties in child custody cases after attempting to protect their children from abuse.

Last week Dr. Liane Leedom wrote about the tragic case Dr. Amy Castillo, whose children were murdered by their psychopathic father after several judges issued rulings that failed to protect them. I hope this terrible and extreme case will be a wake-up call for family courts.

Lovefraud frequently receives e-mail from men and women involved in child custody disputes with sociopaths, who hopefully, are not murderers. Here is one of them:

I am involved in a custody case with a sociopath, however, my case is being fought in Europe where I recently relocated to (I am American, he is European). After being the sole caregiver of my children for five years, I had no choice but to leave them with their father and return to the States. When we separated he took their passports and left the country for a year. It was NOT possible to obtain new passports for children without BOTH parents’ signatures.

Here we go again, another three children murdered after the family courts allowed a psychopathic parent unfettered access them. This is the story of doctor Amy Castillo (a pediatrician) as was told last night on Larry King Live. Dr. Castillo’s problems with her husband began in full force about two years ago when he began “staying out all night.” The couple had decided that he would stay home with the children and that she would practice. However, she was unable to go to work because he could not function in the caretaker role. Due to his behavior, she left him. After threatening to kill himself he was hospitalized.

“A victim of crime shall be treated with fairness, compassion and respect by the criminal justice system.” So states the Crime Victims Constitutional Amendment, added to the state of New Jersey constitution in 1991.

New Jersey also has a 14-point Crime Victims Bill of Rights (NJS 52:4B-36), which expands upon the constitutional amendment. Among its provisions, crime victims and witnesses are entitled to:

• Be treated with dignity and compassion by the criminal justice system.
• Be informed about the criminal justice process.
• Have inconveniences associated with participation in the criminal justice process minimized to the fullest extent possible.

The Bill of Rights sounds good, but it hasn’t done much for Trish Rynn, formerly of Ocean City, New Jersey. She was scammed by a seasoned con artist, Dennis SanSeverino, and now feels she is being further victimized by the New Jersey courts. It is a classic case of Legal Abuse Syndrome.

Last week, Mechele Linehan, 35, of Olympia, Washington, was sentenced to 99 years in prison for the murder of her fiancé, Kent Leppink, back in 1996.

She was accused of convincing another fiancé, John Carlin III, of New Jersey, of killing Leppink. The crime and trial took place in Alaska, and Carlin was found guilty of murder. Under Alaska law, Linehan was ruled equally guilty, so she got the same sentence as Carlin.

“I can find no principal distinction between the puppet who pulls the trigger and the puppeteer who pulls the strings,” said Judge Philip Voland. “In my judgment, Ms. Linehan was the puppeteer who pulled the strings.”

Crime based on murder movie

The case sounds just like a movie. In fact, prosecutors contend that Linehan was inspired by the movie The Last Seduction, in which a woman coaxes her lover into killing her husband for money.

“Victims are created in two ways: by violence or by deceit. Either type of assault immediately renders the victim hostage to the perpetrator.”

So begins the book Legal Abuse Syndrome, by Karin Huffer, MS, MFT. Lovefraud strongly recommends that anyone who has been victimized by a sociopath read this book, whether you have faced your perpetrator in court or not.

The book explains how people who have suffered injury at the hands of some type of predator often face further injury inflicted by lawyers and the courts, who can be, at best, disinterested, and at worst, corrupt. Legal Abuse Syndrome, Huffer says, is a form of post traumatic stress disorder caused by prolonged contact with the so-called “justice” system.

Along the way, however, the author answers many of the questions that those of us victimized by sociopaths have asked:

If I am the victim, why do I feel guilty?

In 2002, Time Magazine named Eliot Spitzer, when he was New York State Attorney General, “Crusader of the Year,” due to his relentless pursuit of corporate crime. He went after the giants of Wall Street, extracting large fines for illegal and unethical behavior.

That’s why his very public downfall has drawn so much interest. And that’s why, now he’s resigned as governor of New York in disgrace, the stories of his aggressiveness, his bullying, and his apparent belief that the rules did not apply to him, are so widespread.

When I first heard that Spitzer was implicated in a prostitution ring, I figured that if anyone had the dirt, it would be the New York Post. How right I was. Frederic U. Dicker, the state editor for the Post, wrote about Spitzer in an article entitled, Bully gets his comeuppance. Here’s how it started:

The Internet Dating Safety Act became law in the state of New Jersey, the home of Lovefraud, on January 13, 2008. It is supposed to take effect next month.

The law applies only to New Jersey, USA, residents. It mandates that any Internet dating site must disclose to New Jersey members, clearly and conspicuously, whether it conducts criminal background checks. “The disclosure shall be provided when an electronic mail message is sent or received by a New Jersey member, on the profile describing a member to a New Jersey member, and on the website pages of the Internet dating service used when a New Jersey member signs up,” the law states. “A disclosure shall be in bold, capital letters in at least 12-point type.”

The keynote speaker had a question for the 200 or so women in the room during the Battered Women, Abused Children and Child Custody conference: “How many of you have been thrown in jail during your custody battle?”

Approximately 15 women raised their hands.

These women had been thrown in jail by the courts—technically on charges such as contempt of court or failure to pay child support. In reality, the women were jailed for trying to protect their children from abusive fathers. At least one woman was a fugitive, unable to return to her home state.

No one in the audience was surprised—except, perhaps, me.

Dr. Liane Leedom and I attended the conference, which was held this past weekend in Albany, New York. It brought together mental health professionals, lawyers, advocates, and victims of domestic violence. It was a sobering experience.

Relationship abuse

Lovefraud recently received the following e-mail from a reader:

My psychologist referred me to this web site. It’s terrific save one section: How can running away from these people be the only solution? Granted, it’s a stop-gap solution to protect yourself from future abuses; however, it’s not a solution for full/final resolution.

Allowing [them] to perpetuate their endeavors and perpetrate them on others only permits proliferation. Please tell me that there is some constructive, legal way to be proactive and preventative in a more communal fashion. I have visions of: 20 years from now they rule the world. It won’t be survival of the fittest. It will have become survival of the sickest.

To have to swallow this reality would be a further devastating blow to my slowly recovering resiliency.